I think Wasserman is an excellent follow during elections .
On other Group W stuff, yesterday the White House said they would provide a list of eyewitnesses to refute Trump accusers. They did and it is the same utterly lame non-repsonsive of 3 from last fall. Two beauty pageant contestants from different events than the woman who came forward, and a ludicrous British liar who said he was on a plane with Trump for the one incident (he was an 18=year old Brit at the time). Not seen any pickup in the mainstream press but I assume it will get some this time around (it did not get much before the election).
Moore spokesman has a long "moment" with Jake Tapper when he is informed that you don't have to be sworn in on a Christian Bible. Worth a watch
I came into today thinking that Moore will probably win so I'm counting this from the fivethirtyeight blog as comparatively optimistic.
[Nate Silver] So the way I'd put it is that the exit polls certainly aren't bad news for Jones. If you'd thought Moore was a slight favorite before -- and that's what I thought when I woke up this morning -- they might push you closer toward thinking the race is truly 50-50. I wouldn't go much further than that, however, because estimating the demographic breakdown of the electorate is not usually the exit polls' strength.
538's live blog is here. They're usually a good place to look for frequently updated commentary during these things.
Yeah, Wasserman seems to be part of it.
Ignoring exit polls (ignoring, ignoring, ignoring .... who am I kidding?) there does seem to be relatively high turnout. Probably a necessary but very from sufficient condition for a Jones win.
My final prediction: Jones 46% Moore 48%
The thing that drives me crazy is that I just today saw yet another thing on what the Republicans will do if Moore wins. Will they vote to expel him? whatever will they do? They won't do anything. They never do anything like that.
11: Right. Among the most pointless stories in the history of the universe.
Given that it's from an institution that produced Dred Scott and Korematsu, Shelby County isn't the most disgraceful decision they've ever issued by a long shot, but I think it pretty clearly beats Bush v. Gore for sheer shit-eating up-is-down contempt for democracy.
The NYT has, I think, the best election tracker.
Slight edge to Moore at this writing.
It is hard to extrapolate without very detailed knowledge of which precincts in a county have reported. A lot of that due to segregation.
Good point from Wasserman on the 538 liveblog:
The reason it's so difficult to tell what's happening so far: Alabama's precincts are so racially polarized that quick swings are the rule, not the exception.
Had anybody mentioned the segregation?
Um, don't look now, but NYT has 65% chance of Jones winning, and a projection of Jones +2.4.
Nate Cohn's Twitter feed provides useful context for the NYT model.
Taking a sharp Jones turn: 76% chance and 4.7-point victory is the median case.
19: Based on big margins in Jefferson (Birmingham). But could be very dependent on urban/suburban ratio counted. IO do not look to that margin to hold. NYTimes said their model does not have granularity beyond county.
Look for Shelby-- big suburban/exurban. The Reps most likely to turn. And no results so far.
Nate Cohen saying there seems to be a turnout differential in rural counties. Jones counties significantly higher than Moore ones in ones counted so far. SO in addition to Jefferson that is what the model is picking up.
This was concerning: https://twitter.com/xobritdear/status/940607836912013317
People are talking about the NYT needle like it's an abusive partner.
This was concerning: https://twitter.com/xobritdear/status/940607836912013317
Thanks for the link. I've seen references to voter suppression but it's interesting to see somebody's direct experience.
Also, combined with this (from the 538 chat), "The county-by-county margins point towards a really tight race. The turnout differentials, however, point toward really high African-American engagement relative to rural whites, and that's very welcome news for Jones." Makes it sound like African-Americans are _really_ motivated.
Alabama this year like many states will have U-shaped results--early (or in this case absentees for Dems) then rurals and then urban cathcup. But since Alabama not nearly as urban as say Ohio, so not as nearly as big of an upswing at the end.
Makes it sound like African-Americans are _really_ motivated.
I can think of at least 4 amendments why.
Enten on the 538 blog:
I'll note, for what it's worth, that the exit poll adjustment based on actual votes has Jones winning by between 2 and 3 percentage points.
Good news is that the one largish rural county with no votes counted went for HRC by 7K.
At this point if Moore holds on it will be because the more suburban precincts with in the counties where Birmingham/Mobile/Montgomery reside came in later than the urban ones. No idea if that is a possibility.
27: God knows the needle has abused me in the past. But this time, I know it will be different.
Looks like the white guy is going to win.
From 538, how is this serious discussion?
"MICAH COHEN 10:14 PM
There's been a lot of talk about whether McConnell/national Republicans want Moore or Jones to win, but which result is better for national Democrats heading into 2018? Is it better to have Moore in the Senate to tar the whole GOP? Or for Jones to win, and have more paths to a real Senate majority?
JULIA AZARI 10:14 PM
I think a Jones win is better for Democrats, Micah. The Republicans are much better at being an opposition party; Democrats have probably maxed out on opposition to Trump. Running a national election on Moore is gonna be tough. One seat closer to a majority is a way better prospect."
I want Jones to win, obviously, but my overwhelming reaction is that I feel thoroughly disappointed in the people of Alabama regardless who wins. (Really, just the white people.) This should not be a close race. A sufficiently large Jones landslide would have changed my view, but I knew that wasn't going to happen.
Looks like the NYT needle came, but it was still disgusted with itself.
37 isn't meant to cast stones. A majority of white people all over this country are monsters. Alabama just has more of them, relatively speaking.
Cue the news analyses of how Jones only won because of black support and if turnout had been "normal" Moore would have won.
Called for Jones by multiple agencies.
White people in Louisiana voted for David Duke for governor. The South has always been a smoldering hellhole.
Thing is, for a moment at least, we can imagine that the country is diversifying enough that white people can be saved from themselves -- that California, and not the Old South, represents our future.
Oh man I hope no one remembers to take away grandpa's phone before he reacts to this.
It's comforting to know that Moore will calmly accept his loss as God's will.
I know. He turned down underaged prostitutes for nothing.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say the Democrats - and the country - are better off without Roy Moore as a fucking Senator.
Republican establishment blames Bannon. Awesome.
They're right, to the extent they aren't to blame for Bannon.
51: And Bannon wing blames lukewarm establishment embrace. Popcorn all around.
Also cue stories about how dems only squeaked out a win because Moore was such a terrible candidate. Except terrible shitheel is pretty much standard GOP candidate at this point.
23: Look for Shelby-- big suburban/exurban. The Reps most likely to turn.
In 2016 Trump won 72% to 23%, tonight 56% to 42%.
55.2 is the best thing I've seen since a bus full of dead pokemons.
And at least 10 counties flipped blue.
It's interesting that even in a race like this, whites didn't flip as a demographic, just enough stayed home to let the non-whites make the margin.
(I'd be curious to know what the white swing was, but CNN doesn't seem to have exit polled AL last year. So I'm going off of the high sixties exit poll from tonight.)
It's not every day I get to feel too cynical.
What a pleasant surprise!
Strange would've won, I'm sure, but the shitheels wanted to annihilate the foe, and overreached.
Wow!
And 46 is an awesome comment.
46: Apparently God is going to get the margin within recount margins and then take it from there. (Current margin 1.5% recount at 0.5%.)
62 me. SOS not having it despite his shitheadness.
Jones still didn't get 25% of the white male vote.
But a bunch of white males apparently sat this one out.
I am not prejudiced or anything, but Christ, white men are awful.
I want credit for not actively being awful whenever I don't want to leave the house.
Yep. If you look at the Wasserman 'target" spreadsheet, Moore actually well exceeded his % targets in almost all rural white counties but turnouts were proportionally down much more than black and "educated" counties (many of which exceed Jones' "targets" plus bigger). So in this election that type of spreadsheet did not help that much. (And probably due to both that plus the large within-county variations the 538 guys and similar were a bit at sea for the early part of the night.) I am wondering if target margin per county would have been more illustrative.
Let's not forget the 2% of white men who dragged their ass all the way to the polls to write "Could we have a racist who doesn't molest children please?" They are the true heroes.
Presumably Jared did not get many write-in votes.
They also bend the arc who but vote against pedophiles.
Daily News in with a "Screw You & The Horse You Rode In On" headline.
I need a cigarette.
Now to stall the fucking tax bill.
||
No cigarette, but we can celebrate with an on-form Xkcd.
|>
Guffawing at Trump blaming write-ins as if that's somehow exogenous.
What a welcome change of pace! Jones needs to make sure his office delivers A+ constituent service -- it's his best chance of holding the seat in 2020.
The interesting thing (for me, could be wrong) in these Southern states (including for these purposes Texas) is that if you can bolster minority turnout just a bit and get some fairly small percentage of the white vote (like, 30%) you can win a statewide election with a mainstream Democrat. The problem in those states is the absolutely overwhelming racist block voting of the white population combined with voter suppression of the minority population. But peel off just enough white voters and have decent minority turnout and you have competitive races. Very different than the upper midwest or the mountain west where you have to get like 40% (or in the mountain west more like 45%) of the white vote in play to win.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Alabama is winnable in the remotely near future for a Democrat not running against a child molestor who the establishment party has hated for years. But I don't understand why there's not more talk about bolstering Mexican turnout in South Texas and getting every sympathetic white person to the polls. Maybe Trump and Ted Cruz will do it for us but I doubt it.
Moore is more likely to secede than concede.
We're all joking but could he actually just steal it? State government would help right?
82 - Probably not "steal" but Moore may be able to engage in sufficient shenanigans to get the Alabama Secretary of State to delay certifying the results for as long as possible (currently set for I think December 26) which means that Strange stays in his seat longer. I don't claim special insight into Alabama politics but I believe the Republican establishment there wouldn't gonout on a limb for Moore but would happily assist in delaying seating Jones for as long as possible. How long depends on Alabama election law which, not gonna spend time looking that up.
If the margin doesn't trigger an automatic recount it appears Moore can NOT demand one even if he pays for it (contrary to some reports otherwise). The SOS, despite being a strong Moore supporter himself, has so far held very firm against any recount shenanigans.
I don't understand why there's not more talk about bolstering Mexican turnout in South Texas and getting every sympathetic white person to the polls. Maybe Trump and Ted Cruz will do it for us but I doubt it.
Maybe we just run in different circles, but I'm seeing lots of enthusiasm for Beto O'Rourke along exactly those lines. I'm sure this result will further encourage it.
Didn't the State of Alabama win the right yesterday to destroy some sort of digital voting records? I'm not to clear on what the thing was, but if its that important to them that the records be destroyed, uh, maybe we should be concerned about that with regard to a recount?
Goddamnit people enough with the emotional rollercoaster.
85: I'm also seeing early enthusiasm on the Democratic side for Lupe Valdez for TX governor. Of course Lt Gov is the more powerful position, but Gov is a headline office anyway.
(I haven't re-checked the figures, but I seem to remember that in 2016 presidential voting, Texas was a closer contest than Iowa.)
It's not within the margin that would trigger a recount.
On the one hand, this is great news. On the other hand, it says a lot about the state of the country that I'm genuinely shocked that the creepy bible thumping pedophile didn't win. I'd been more or less taking it for granted that he would.
Well, he would have saved the rich a lot in taxes.
"Prolapsed" is the technical term. And no.
Speaking of pedophiles, Dennis Hastert is being released from prison but legally barred from being with children unless there is another adult present and that adult knows he paid money to conceal having sex with children. That's going to make it hard to get around outside of prison unless there are lots of adults to help. So, I think it would be good to remind every adult that former Republican speaker of the House of Representatives Dennis Hastert, the longest serving Republican leader of the House and the man who let the impeachment of Bill Clinton for having sex with an adult go ahead, paid money to conceal having had sex with children.
I propose calling the terms of his release Hastert Rule 2.0.
This time, it's personal.
I don't think he'll ever concede. It's fine that he just loses.
In terms of income, he's in the business of shaking down the suckers by playing victim of the liberals/RINOs/etc. "I was cheated out of a Senate seat" is better for that than "I'm the only possible Republican shitty enough to have lost that race".
You know Dirty Harry? The serial killer pays somebody to beat him up so he can be a victim of police brutality and it "works" for values of "works" that don't involve (*SPOILER ALERT*) being killed at the end of the movie. I think some conservatives have been watching Dirty Harry and getting ideas other than "guns are good, civil rights are bad."
It's interesting that even in a race like this, whites didn't flip as a demographic, just enough stayed home to let the non-whites make the margin.
I was pondering this last night: how many whites affirmatively stayed home (that is, beyond midterm and low enthusiasm reductions, which I think would have happened with any R right now), how many actually flipped, and how many did a write-in.
If I'm doing my math right, at least 75% of Alabama whites approve of Trump; only 48% of last night's electorate did. That's suggestive of something, I think. The gap is so big that I think it sort of confirms that, for Trump lovers, Trump>GOP. That is, despite the rally and stuff, I'd speculate that Moore was lumped with the shitty, unpopular GOP agenda more than he was viewed as an avatar of Trump (after all, it's not as if DJT is the guy who introduced him to AL). IOW, a lot of MAGA hats really DGAF beyond rooting for Donald.
Cue the news analyses of how Jones only won because of black support and if turnout had been "normal" Moore would have won.
I haven't seen that yet but I am certainly seeing the liberal counterpart everywhere ("Disgraceful that white people voted for Roy Moore. Thank black people for bailing y'all out once again").
Or let me try it another way: ~25% of AL whites like Trump but didn't show up last night. Some chunk of them were conscientious objectors who stayed home because Moore sucks (I assume some chunk of white Alabamans have hated him a long time). Some chunk are slackers. But some chunk love Trump but not the GOP, and won't show up if he's not on the ballot. That jibes with the known existence of Obama-Trump voters.
And if that's the case, then the 2018 wave could be something really historic. And it gives me even more hope that Cruz could go, since he's so loathsome.
I would like to register complaints about yinz mathing.
On a semi-related note, is it weird that nobody ever notes that McCain's seat will almost certainly come open by the end of 2018? Is it too morbid, or are people in denial? If I'm not mistaken, his form of cancer is like 95% fatal within 12 months of diagnosis (at the stage where it was when diagnosed). Like, it would be a medical miracle for him to be alive next fall, let alone able to function as Senator.
I get why the national press doesn't dwell on it, and I assume that the Dems are thinking about it while keeping quiet, but I feel as if nobody ever so much as hints at it.
Also: if Romney were to win Hatch's seat, he obviously wouldn't caucus with the Dems, but how independent would he be? A 99.9% fake like McCain, or merely 99% fake like Collins?
IOW, a lot of MAGA hats really DGAF beyond rooting for Donald.
Moore was wearing the wrong sort of hat, clearly. (I think it was Seth Meyer who went off on a tangent about Moore speaking Russian and speculated that he might actually be a Russian sleeper, dressed in the way that a not very bright Russian would think all Americans dress.)
107.last: The better to attract young American FOXES!
104: I don't know why I would think I have any insight into Alabama Republicans but I don't agree with this. Trump went all in for Roy Moore, while many of the Republican establishment figures either hedged or expressly came out against him. I think Moore voters were Trump's base -- the ones that will start peeing on each other when the pee tape comes out. The Republican voters that stayed home were the ones that were iffy about Trump and only voted for him because Hillary is pure evil, and/or tax cuts and the Supreme Court.
109: The Republican voters that stayed home were the ones that were iffy about Trump and only voted for him because Hillary is pure evil, and/or tax cuts and the Supreme Court.
Yes. I think suburban Shelby County mentioned above illustrates that:
Romney/Obama 2012: 77% 22%
Trump/Clinton 2016: 72% 23%
Moore/Jones 2017: 56% 42%
So, a small move away from R with Trump greatly accelerated. Probably a combo of a Moore being a bridge to far and dissatisfaction with Trump performance as President*.
*So far the R/D splits in all the specials have been highly correlated with Trump approval/disapproval (caveat, gleaned from exit polls).
106.1- The 95% statistic is for all diagnoses, and as much as the American health care system sucks for the general population, for the top 0.1%/famous there really is a better shot at surviving something like that. I don't have numbers or know if there are even enough cases of "Glioblastoma in 80 year olds with >$5M in assets" to be statistically significant, but I'd wager it's better than 5% survival at 12 months.
I mean, look at Magic and HIV- long term survival is common now, but at the time people thought he was going to die, and he got front line treatment that let him be one of the early long-term survivors because he was rich and famous.
I mean, look at Magic and HIV
Rowling really dropped the ball on that one.
In least consequential WH departure ever, Omarossa is on her way out (April Ryan says after some 'drama" at the WH last night). One report claimed timing on night of Moore defeat was not coincidental but not sure why that would be.
"Escorted out" says CNN. I'm here for all of your Trump Administration negativity no matter how trivial.
Much less trivial, DOJ apparently invited reporters over late last night to view the "offending" FBI private texts between agents. Fuck, let's see the fucking NY office FBI texts.
Trump just needed to find a black woman to blame.
105: Ah, just saw it. I knew I was missing a piece of info, but lost track.
My point wasn't the arithmetic, but combining of data from different elections separated by over a year and for different offices by just using arithmetic.
109: bad math aside, ~55% of the populace of AL likes Trump. Trump's boy could only get 48% of the vote yesterday. Some of that is the pedophilia thing, but we all saw the denial and motivated reasoning on that front (plus, of course, Trump fans are established blind eye-turners on that stuff). Trump's full-throated support for Moore wasn't enough to get ~13% of his base to show up.
118: Oh no, I wasn't using 2016 data; I was using recent polling saying that Trump's statewide popularity right now is ~55%. Combined that with 70% white to get 75% of whites like Trump.
119 makes sense, but 101/104 was confusing me because way more than 25% of whites who like Trump didn't show-up last night. Overall turnout was under 40%. If 75% of Trump voters showed up, Senator Roy Moore would be on a victory cruise of the mall. You can't go from state-wide polling results to exit polling results like that because also people of people who didn't like Trump didn't or couldn't vote either.
On a semi-related note, is it weird that nobody ever notes that McCain's seat will almost certainly come open by the end of 2018? Is it too morbid, or are people in denial?
I considered noting it, but went with "too morbid." I don't actually wish for the guy to die anytime soon. And yet, that could flip the Senate, no?
The obvious response would be an alternative deal, in which the US agrees to allow Russian media to report on the US without censorship, and in return starts to openly wage cyberwar on the Russian government.
And yet, that could flip the Senate, no?
If the Democrats win in Arizona?
Well, t would make it 50-50, but (and I appreciate that yesterday they won in Alabama) it's probably not very likely...
I agree that it isn't likely, but it is entirely possible that an Arizona primary would produce a candidate who is every bit as bad as Moore. For example, there is a former sheriff who only avoided jail because of a presidential pardon.
Anyway, I don't like somehow Bannon is going to wake up, take a look at his mottled face in the mirror, and say "I'm going to stop playing 'find the biggest shithead'".
126: ah-ha. That does sound rather plausible.
And yet, that could flip the Senate, no?
Not all by itself, but the big thing is that it would create 3 good shots for the 2 pickups they need (plus 2 long shots in TX and TN).
I don't know who's out there to run, but unless there's a popular, charismatic Republican in waiting, you have to assume the same 10% headwind the GOP is facing everywhere. Trump won by 4.5%.
Meanwhile, is this where we discuss Dayton's pick of his LG Tina Smith? Any locals want to chip in?
My understanding (I think from here) is that there were much more interesting candidates available.
Michelle Bachmann for instance...
Bachmann-Turner Diaries Overdrive.
Another way to look at it is that the last off-cycle election in AL (2010) had ~1.5 million voters: 967,000 for R and 515,000 for D.
When Sessions ran unopposed in 2014, he got 795,000 votes.
This one had ~1.3 million voters: 650,000 for R and 671,000 for D.
160,000 extra folks came out of the woodwork to vote D for a special election. 150,000 folks who voted R when there was no alternative decided to stay home. I don't think those are the same 150,000.
Percentage-wise, Jones did much better among college-educated whites than Obama by quite a bit. I've not see somebody parse the exit polls enough to tell, but I suspect that is largely because the people who stayed home or wrote-in "A Mole On Jeff Session's Right Buttock" were college-educated Republicans.
In a sane world, it wouldn't have been this close, but I guess we can at least savor what an own goal this was. It seems like just about any R candidate less repulsive than Moore would have won, but the GOP just had to let their freak flag fly.
I think among college educated white voters, there's genuinely a large number who switched R to D. You don't get Jones winning Huntsville just from turnout. (Overall I agree it's mostly changes in turnout.)
On a semi-related note, is it weird that nobody ever notes that McCain's seat will almost certainly come open by the end of 2018? Is it too morbid, or are people in denial?
Seems to me like a combo of morbid and extremely low likelihood of it resulting in a change of party. Maybe that probability will be assessed differently now, but it still seems like a very, very long shot, absent such a nationwide wave that one senate seat doesn't matter.
That twitter stream linked in the other thread gives a good roadmap. I'm sure the NAACP can/will do the same in Texas next year. I wonder, though, whether there's an equivalent player that has the same kind of direct line to Hispanic voters there.
139: It's not the low likelihood of a D win, because people are constantly talking about the other AZ-SEN race.
I bet a senator Romney wouldn't buck the party on any policy stuff but would be different with appointees and corruption investigations.
112: I was at a car dealer getting service and saw him on the View. You could see that he was struggling.
My uncle got diagnosed with glioblastoma and is going pretty quickly. It briefly looked semi hopeful.
His surgeries were pretty successful, but the lack of coordination between the academic medical center where he had his 2nd surgery, his PCP, local ambulances skilled rehab facilities is going to kill him soon enough.
One SNF gave him an anticoagulant for a week by accident and then he fell and broke his hip which meant that they had to wait to repair his hip. It also turned out that he got pneumonia but nobody told my aunt.
If you had private nurses at home and s full-time care coordinator you might do better.
Everybody on The View is struggling.
I'm very sorry to hear about your uncle.
139: It's not the low likelihood of a D win, because people are constantly talking about the other AZ-SEN race.
But that was only possible because of the candidate being Moore, and indeed a very large part of the discussion was about Moore's scandals, rather than the likelihood of flipping the seat, until of course it was flipped.
I'll grant, an Arpaio candidacy might produce a similar situation. But, again, that didn't seem like a possibility until pretty recently. Certainly not until his pardon.
I don't think it will take something so extreme in Arizona. The (admittedly very early) polling for 2018 shows an even race or a slight D advantage and Trump only won the state by 4% (compared to 18% in Arizona).
They say Flake could easily win general election but he can't win a Republican primary so he's leaving. It won't take the full-Arapio to win. Just your standard RINO-hunter.
146.1 is a misread. Flake's seat in Arizona is up for grabs, and people thing D has a shot.
The hardest thing, if both come available, will be finding 2 good candidates. Although if you have one that's good enough, nobody will split tickets between two Senate seats when nobody is an incumbent.
Best case is that a normal R goes up for Flake's seat against the best available Dem, then Arpaio (or someone less odious but also ridiculous a la Angle) goes for McCain's seat against a mediocre Dem.
There's some nutcase potential Arizona R Senate candidate. A woman I think. Was talked about with regard to Flake's seat.
Arpaio did lose his reelection to sheriff, eventually, didn't he?
151: He's out of office, but I can't remember if he lost an election or was merely convicted of a felony.
I think he lot. But that was Maricopa which includes Phoenix. So a lot of wingnuts in the state have not had a chance to vote for him (but offset by Tucson, generally "liberal.")
||
The USA Today anti-Trump Editorial is remarkable (via Vox).
I am struck not only by the fact that USA Today would take such a strong position but by the tone (which is the tone of politics in 2017) which reads a bit like somebody writing for a High School paper and trying to see just how far they can go.
If recent history is any guide, the unique awfulness of the Trump era in U.S. politics is only going to get worse. Trump's utter lack of morality, ethics and simple humanity has been underscored during his 11 months in office. Let us count the ways:
|>
153 is correct.
On the other hand if he's more popular with rural yahoos than with his own suburban and urban constituents, you'd think he would have run for statewide office long before this.
Not much of a rural population in Arizona. The Phoenix suburbs are historically rock red and that's what makes the state Republican, even though Tucson is liberal. But Phoenix is changing politically reasonably quickly.
I think he lot. But that was Maricopa which includes Phoenix. So a lot of wingnuts in the state have not had a chance to vote for him (but offset by Tucson, generally "liberal.")
Not much of a "but" since the county included Phoenix all four times it elected Arpaio originally. More about how much Phoenix is (may be) changing.
Isn't a lot of the rural population native American? The other thing that makes AZ red is all the retirement communities with average age of 76. All the people who used to live in orange county when it was Reagan's base.
122: Too bad Victoria Nuland isn't still doing Russia / Eastern Europe at State. She would have given a properly salty response.
Speaking of pedophiles, Dennis Hastert is being released from prison
So how long before he's offered a Fox News gig?
Isn't a lot of the rural population native American?
Yes, Arizona is one of the states where "rural" doesn't necessarily imply "white." (As is Alabama, for that matter.) The rural population is massively outnumbered by the Phoenix suburbs, though, so it rarely has a large influence on statewide elections.
To put some numbers to it, here are the 2016 Census population estimates:
Arizona: 6,931,071
Maricopa County: 4,242,997 (61% of AZ)
Phoenix City: 1,615,017 (38% of Maricopa)
145: Thanks, but we were never super close. I'm closer to my aunt through marriage and am mostly worried about how she'll manage without him. They are ridiculously in love in a way that borders on co-dependence. She'll do better without him than he would without her, but I don't think she has enough social support. She's running herself ragged trying to take care of him.
Dennis Hastert is being released from prison but legally barred from being with children unless there is another adult present and that adult knows he paid money to conceal having sex with children.
So that's what people mean when they talk about "the Hastert rule"!
The presumptive Democratic candidate for Flake's seat is U.S. Representative Kyrsten Sinema, who's an interesting figure -- started out in the Green Party and was fairly progressive while in the AZ state government, but has taken a much more centrist tack in the House and bucked the party on a number of votes. (As far as cultural issues, I think she's the only open atheist and open bisexual in Congress; Arizona voters tend not to care about that kind of thing.) She's likely to run on the same "bipartisan problem-solver" message as Jones, and stands a good chance of doing well on it, especially given who the Republicans might end up dragging into the arena. So far there's Kelli Ward (the nutcase Stormcrow was trying to remember, who previously tried to primary McCain), and some guy whose claim to fame is running a revenge porn site.
If a second seat comes open, I don't know. People always talk about Gabrielle Giffords's astronaut husband.
Romney won Arizona by 9 points. Trump won it by 3.5. There is a bit of a Mormon-voter effect to account for, but still.
AIMHMHB I was in Monument Valley a couple of years ago and this Navajo chap mentioned that the Navajo don't actually own it in perpetuity, it's on a 150 year lease signed in 1868. So we did the sums and asked what happens in 2018 and he said cheerfully that presumably the federal government renews the lease, it's not like they'd want another war with the Navajo. Awkward silence. "Though we're not really sure which way Trump would go on that." Really awkward silence.
So, something else to look forward to in the new year.
166: Whatbis revenge porn? I don't dare to google it right now.
169 When shitheads post the naked pics/vids of their ex-gfs on the internet.
Moore still hasn't conceded. I hope he never concedes. I hope he keeps on at it for months, and I hope that he gets as much media attention as possible while he's doing it.
"We are indeed in a struggle to preserve our republic, our civilization, and our religion, and to set free a suffering humanity. And the battle rages on," Moore says in the video.
Sounds about right, actually.
Especially if he keeps releasing videos. Alabama bin Laden!
There's a good post at Religion Dispatches pointing out that Moore here is being a real originalist. John Winthrop did not believe in democracy, either.
Even further back than that. The Wampanoag Indians didn't believe in democracy either - they were an oligarchy in which power was held by a few wealthy landholding families.
Way to go back in history until you find a brown person to blame.
(As far as cultural issues, I think she's the only open atheist and open bisexual in Congress;
Aside from Lindsey Graham of course
Maybe more relevant now than before the vote, so I an re-posting one of his advisers incredulously learning about variety in what you can be sworn in on. Helps to get a read on who he surrounds himself with.
178: Speaking of whom, what the ever-loving fuck does Trump have on that guy. The sycophancy, it goes to 11.
181: Yes. It's crazy given all the terrible things he said about Trump not all that long ago. There's the blackmail theory, and the other theory that he desperately wants to be Secretary of State. But why would he want that job? It's just more humiliation.
And since this the active politics thread, I do urge people to read this semi-long piece in the WaPo on the Admin and Russia policy over the past year.
It has expected WaPo establishment foreign policy framing, but so many nuggets and vignettes, and in the end a good review.
Russia-related intelligence that might draw Trump's ire is in some cases included only in the written assessment and not raised orally, said a former senior intelligence official familiar with the matter. In other cases, Trump's main briefer -- a veteran CIA analyst -- adjusts the order of his presentation and text, aiming to soften the impact.
His demeanor with the German leader was in striking contrast with his encounters with Putin and other authoritarian figures. "Who are the three guys in the world he most admires? President Xi [Jinping] of China, [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan and Putin," one Trump adviser said. "They're all the same guy." (not sure who is being quoted, one of the "advisers" I assume)
182: Or, worryingly, that Trump will actually bomb the shit of NK or Iran.
168 http://reta.nmsu.edu/modules/longwalk/lesson/document/treaty.htm#article13
It wasn't a lease.
185 - what I learned from that was that some prominent Navajo had amazing names in Spanish. What's your name? "Muerto de Hombre." You? "Muchachos Mucho." How about you?" "They call me Grande."
Speaking of things in the Washington Post, Tim Cook and Charles Koch have a joint op-ed piece on the Dreamers. I wonder if that's not going to be seen as "permission" to not be a complete shit by enough Republicans to fix this.
There's the blackmail theory, and the other theory that he desperately wants to be Secretary of State. But why would he want that job? It's just more humiliation.
He's a sub?
185: huh. Interesting.
But the area given for the reservation in that treaty doesn't include Monument Valley; the westernmost boundary is longitude 109 degrees 30 minutes west, which is well to the east of Monument Valley, around Red Mesa.
The Navajo nation does extend to Monument Valley, of course, but that must be covered by some other agreement.
Plus I am fairly inclined to believe a Navajo who lives in Monument Valley when it comes to questions involving the Navajo and the conditions under which they live in Monument Valley.
191 - when Muerto de Hombre speaks, you listen.
191 Right, but when one speaks of 1868, that treaty is what they're talking about. I think the Monument Valley was included in the Executive Order of May 17, 1884, but left my materials on the history of the Navajo Nation back at my old job.
One of my first cases was litigation concerning state authority with respect to oil production on the Aneth Extension, added to the Navajo Nation by exec order in 1905, and ratified by Congress in 1933. Later I represented a group living in an area added to the Nation by Congress in 1949 -- they'd gotten a side understanding in 1868, and folks were still, in the 1990s, worked up about how the Nation was understanding both the 1868 deal and the 1949 legislation. There's often a lot of what heebie would call "folk knowledge" around these things.
I wonder about a counterfactual world where Weinstein didn't happen, and what effect that might have had on the Moore/Jones race. Would Moore's accusers even have come forward?
Likewise, I wonder how much impact the specific events that resulted from Weinstein -- particularly Franken -- played a role. Maybe it would have made no difference, but part of me thinks that had these incidents not remained in the headlines -- and had the Democrats not established themselves so firmly on the side of basic decency -- a few more evangelicals might have made it out to vote in Alabama.
192: thanks - looks like it, according to this handy map...
http://www.nnaa.nndcd.org/eomap11x8.pdf
Interesting. It doesn't look like any of that land is on any sort of lease. Folk knowledge, like you say...
Moments in ignorance: I have literally only just realised Moore is the 5,280lb Ten Commandments rock guy. I remember the incident, but to me it just seemed like the kind of thing Alabama gets up to.
I did not know before this election cycle that in the Vietnam War, Moore was an MP captain who deemed himself at high risk of fragging.
196: Learning that reminded me of that Principal Skinner Simpsons meme: "Am I out of touch? No, it's the children who are wrong."
It reminded me of when Principal Skinner was a sergeant in the Vietnam War who deemed himself at high risk of fragging.
...that would be a more apt comparison. Although that I do have some sympathy for poor Armin Tamzarian. I'm not sure if Moore or that Kentucky state legislator who just committed suicide is more loathsome.
Yeah, but who were Guero and Cabello Amarillo? Were there really white and blonde Navajos?
Muerto de Hombre is badass, but I'd rather be Ganado Mucho.
196. If he'd commanded a company I was in he would have been.
194 I'd forgotten that one of the main issues in my Aneth case was "what's a lease?"
https://openjurist.org/53/f3d/1145/state-of-utah-v-babbitt
I was a little concerned to see I.P. Freeley and Major Woody signing that treaty on behalf of the government.
Yeah, but who were Guero and Cabello Amarillo? Were there really white and blonde Navajos?
Probably not "blonde" the way we would think of it today, but there's a whole lot of mixed ancestry and physical variation of various sorts among Navajos. "Yellowhair" is a fairly common Navajo surname even today.
And Ganado Mucho was a very prominent leader (though not quite as prominent as Barboncito and Manuelito). The community of Ganado, Arizona is named after him; it was previously called Pueblo Colorado but people kept confusing it with Pueblo, Colorado so they changed the name.
I blame the guy with all the question marks on his suit.
Noted artist Robert Yellowhair is not exactly leaning into his name. That is a Chinese-politician level of black hair dye.
108: Wow to the end of that. They just figure, welp, our dates are busy raping our neighbor in our apartment, so we may as well go elsewhere & party. !?
Apologies if 211 is making thngs explicit: I'm entirely too drunk to care.
You never watched enough TV in the early 80s. This guy.
Early 80s? I remember a question mark guy from late 90s.
All you old people are question marks for me.
Late 90s? In the 2000s, that guy had a girlfriend in the building down the block from mine, so I'd see him (yes, he wears a question mark-covered suit in his daily life), or his question mark-covered Mini parked in the neighborhood, all the time. I think there was also a question mark-covered Vespa for a while. Still see him now and then around town, though I think it's been a couple years.
If you have a suit like that, you probably have a girlfriend in every building.
There was a documentary about Matthew Lesko on Vice, where he says something like "Every person has their own artist inside of them. I was lucky enough to find my art and live my art. That is the secret to a rich and fulfilling life." He was dead serious.
Not to be obscure, Lesko is the question mark suits, "You can get money from the government!" guy.
I was thinking of him because I recalled the commercials said to send to Pueblo, Colorado for the book. Except now that I think about it, that was probably not his book, but an actual government information thing.
Pueblo, Colorado or Pueblo Colorado? Apparently these are details of consequence.
The former. I remember the 'CO' on the screen.
Those ads made me want to go to Pueblo CO. All of the government's information is there, in convenient pamphlet form!
But that wasn't the Mr. Question-Mark Suit, was it?
I was unaware how much of an old steel town Pueblo was until we stopped there on a recent vacation.
Well, of course Ganado Mucho was a prominent leader. His name wasn't Perdido Mucho.
